Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-10-18
COURT OF APPEALS.
Synopsis OF the Decision In the Case OF
the Austin Liquor Dealer Fight
ing the New Law.
Attorneys Cannot Make Their Fees Out of a
Defendant Who Has Paid Their
CLIENT his Judgment.
Correspondence of the Gazette.

from Bell. This was suit for the re
covery of damages for injury to csr.
rage. Held: Where the evidence as tC
negligence is conflicting and the judg
ment is not against the evidence or the
preponderance of evidence the iudgmen
will be affirmed. Affirmed. Wilson, J.
George E. King vs.. Harriet Pulls ct al.
appeal from Ell Psso. This was suit OF
foreign judgment rendered in the state
of Colorado. Defendants in the cour
below objected TO the Introduction in eV
idence OF the judgment of the court il
Colorado because it was certified to By
the Judge Of the court in which the cause
was tried. Plaintiffs had proven that un
der the laws of Colorado Judge cannot
act as clerk himself or appoint one Held
| That the Judgment was admissible in ev-
| idence and the court did not err in ad
hitting same. Affirmed. Wilson, J.
W. A. Abbott VS.. the state; appeal from
Tyler. In this case it was shown by the
affidavit Of the Sheriff of Tyler county
that the appellant escaped from the county
all of Tyler county on September 6, 1887
1t was also shown that he was recaptured
on September 9, 1887. The assistant
Attorney General moves to dismiss on
these grounds. The motion is sustained
and the case is dismissed. Dismissed
White, P. J.
T, Ratio & Cows. j. P. Cassidy; appeal
from Ellis. The appellant levied upon q
stock OF goods valued at 5000, imple-
ments, fixtures, etc, necessary to the
business OF retail merchant, valued Of
$401 IS, and a lease of store room $3.50,
all belonging TO appellee, who alleges they
were levied upon with intent to iniure
hlm. Appellee obtained judgment for
$3.50 actual damages, and $l00 punitory
damages. Appellees remitred the 500
punitory damages. Held: The evidence
showed that the property seized and
converted belonged to plaintiff. The dam
ages are not excessive. Affirmed. Will
son, j.
S. L. Davenport ct al. vs. Davidson;
appeal from Comanche. The machinery
in controversy in this case was levied
upon and sold, appellants becoming the
purchasers Of said sale. 1t appears that
appellees had 8 mortgage on said proper
W and refused to give it up. Appellants
hiring this suit to recover this property.
Held: There was no error admitting mort
gage held by appellees as evidence; the
jury fully sustaiDs the judgment, and it
is therefore affirmed Affirmed. Will
son, j.
j. NJ. Sanchez vs.. Atchison, Topeka
and Santa Fe Railroad, ct al; appeal
from Ell Paso. In this case the cause of
action occurred in Mexico. Held: The
plaintiff has no cause of action within the
jurisdiction of the courts of this state.
Affirmed White, P J.
Cicero Davis vs.the State; appeal from
Wood. Appellant complains because the
affidavit was not fled until after an
nouncement Of ready for trial by both
parties in the court below Held: It is in
cumbent on the appellant to show this
fact, and it nowhere appears upon
the record. The statement of facts
were not filed until nine days after the
of court, and without an
order of the same, and cannot therefore
be admitted. Affirmed. Wilson, J.
G. L Edwards ct al. vs. D. G. Price ct
al; appeal from Ellis. Appellants attor-
neys brought suit for carbohydrates on
promissory note and recovered Judgment.
1t appears that the party deposited the
note upon which judgment was recovered
with his attorneys (sppellsnts) to secure
their fee. The party sgainst whom judg-
ment was rendered in the court below
paid the judgment to the plaintiff instead
of his attorneys. The attorneys, appel
lants in this case, failed to collect their
fee, and issued execution against the
parties who had already paid their client.
The court below sustained an Injunction
to prevent the sale of property levied
upon. Held: In this there was no error.
s firynad White D r
A. Rickelman VS.. j. S. & W. L. Lenoir;
appeal from Falls. Where the
court excluded all testimony
as to the sufficiency Of the repairs
and condition of fence during a lease, and
also excluded all testimony IS to the in
suficiency Of the repairs made by appel |
lees during the lease, and charged the
Jury that if they believed from the evil |
dence appellees agreed to repair the |
fence, it was their duty to so repair and |
hat the repairs must be of such charsc- |
Ter as would reasonably last during the
lime for which the pasture was to DE used |
0y appellant: Held: Not reversible error. |
Affirmed. Wilson, J.
6. K. Baisden vs.. @. L. Watson; appeal |
rom Limestone. Appellant bought cot
ION OF appellee's tenant, Holly, without
AuoWlnS hOI4y plaC0 Oh residence, or
hat he WAS tenant of Watson, or that |
Watson had landlords lien on said cot
on. Watson recovered Judgment for
he cotton I'm the court below: Held: That
here was no error in the court below,
he judgment being warranted by the evil
ience. Affirmed. White, P. j.
Elk Parte r. d Bell, from Travis. Rela-
or in this proceeding, makes original ap-
'lication to this Court for the writ of
labeas corpus, alleging that he is illegal
y restrained of his liberty, and praying
hat upon hearing of the same he may
,e discharged from custody. This is q
prosecution under section of an act
II March 30, 1887, amendatory OF former
cts regulating the sale Of spirituous and
ther Intoxicating liquors. The applicant
eing seller Of malt liquors, is prose-
uted for failing to post up in conspfc-
Gus place, in his place of business, the
5000 dollars license required to be is
ued by the Clerk, and is held in custody
nder capiss issued on this charge.
he applicant admits the truth of the
barge, but AYERS that he is illegally re-
trained In his liberty because there was ,
o legal method provided by law. where. ,